collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Idaho elk harvest graphs 1989-2012. You won't believe what happened after wolves  (Read 29680 times)

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
Sounds like a politician. 

With this wishy washy type of thinking.  Lets double the harvest rate and blame "other" factors and pat ourselves on the back to be helping the genetics of elk as we only kill the dumb ones.  :o

There's nothing wishy washy about it and you're right the matter is very political. I hate to put it this way, but releasing wolves on the existing elk populations in the lower 48 was the equivalent of sending small pox infested blankets to Native Americans who had never ever been exposed to such a disease. The kill rate is horrifically high.

The thing is, we had the political will to eradicate small pox in the long run. But we don't have such will with wolves these days so in the face of that you have to look into what increases elk survival rates. What causes them to fall prey to wolves? What can be done to limit that? The obvious answer is to manage wolves, but what over and above that can be done?

It's no secret that forest management practices in this country, particularly on National Forest lands, have gone down the toilet. I can likely find a graph that would similarly show the decline of forest management and a correlation with decreasing elk numbers in some of those affected areas in Idaho.

Again, I recognize this is a wolf forum and as such other factors aren't the focus, but serious elk management in the age of wolves requires looking beyond the predator.

I agree with your post, excessive hunting seasons and reduced logging in the Lolo caused the initial elk decline and similarly in some other units. However, we can't forget that smallpox (and wolves) is a fatal disease, we need to continually immunize for smallpox (and wolves) to keep the disease from getting out of hand.

Agreed.

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3602
When an otherwise intelligent person is loosing a debate they tend to go to great lengths make things absurdly complex.
Personally speaking, in debates I tend to side more with those that present their views without resorting to name calling or insults.  :twocents:
I feel like some folks have a hard time differentiating attacking logic, ideas and data from personal attacks (and I'm not suggesting that's you bob33).  It is not a personal attack to point out misinformation or provide different perspectives and interpretations.  I feel like I always attack the logic/idea...but then I almost always get a response trying to attack my credibility (he's not a hunter, he works for wdfw etc.).  I'm not a conflict averse person so I usually do get sucked into the back and forth and that is my fault.  I actually think *most* of the time bearpaw does set the example pretty well for how to respond to people who disagree with the logic, data etc. that he posts...he doesn't back down but he usually tries hard to focus on the topic, not the individual.

 :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, you've done as much name calling and or made demeaning/insulting comments as anyone on this forum. KFhunter used to have a very small sampling of your finesse in his signature. You have called me names and insulted on uncountable occasions, I am learning to ignore your low level of communication and not get drawn to that level, but occasionally it is hard to ignore your insults/name calling and human reaction gets the best of me!
I'm confused...I said I am at fault too so I don't understand your pot/kettle comment.  You and kf have said a whole lot of derogatory and condescending things about me as well...dont even try to suggest you guys are some saints.  My point is it is not a personal attack to say someone is wrong or to disagree. 
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline KFhunter

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 34512
  • Location: NE Corner
or Elk smart enough to hang out in the parking lots hob knobbing with the tourists.




Bad example, there are many many many instances of elk walking into peoples' yards and causing problems in places with no wolves in sight.

These Elk are still counted in the stats that Bearpaw is providing adding to the total herd of YNP.   They're very relevant in that regard. 

Remove/Ignore all the parking lot Elk habituated to people and the charts would be even worse.


Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9187
or Elk smart enough to hang out in the parking lots hob knobbing with the tourists.




Bad example, there are many many many instances of elk walking into peoples' yards and causing problems in places with no wolves in sight.

These Elk are still counted in the stats that Bearpaw is providing adding to the total herd of YNP.   They're very relevant in that regard. 

Remove/Ignore all the parking lot Elk habituated to people and the charts would be even worse.

Wolves seem to have this affect on deer also, take Twisp and Winthrop as a perfect example, this spring/summer Does were having fawns in the orchard behind Hanks Market.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 06:10:15 AM by wolfbait »

Offline bearpaw

  • Family, Friends, Outdoors
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 38437
  • Location: Idaho<->Colville
  • "Rather Be Cougar Huntin"
    • http://www.facebook.com/DaleDenney
    • Bearpaw Outfitters
  • Groups: NRA, SCI, F4WM, NWTF, IOGA, MOGA, CCOC, BBB, RMEF, WSTA, WSB
When an otherwise intelligent person is loosing a debate they tend to go to great lengths make things absurdly complex.
Personally speaking, in debates I tend to side more with those that present their views without resorting to name calling or insults.  :twocents:
I feel like some folks have a hard time differentiating attacking logic, ideas and data from personal attacks (and I'm not suggesting that's you bob33).  It is not a personal attack to point out misinformation or provide different perspectives and interpretations.  I feel like I always attack the logic/idea...but then I almost always get a response trying to attack my credibility (he's not a hunter, he works for wdfw etc.).  I'm not a conflict averse person so I usually do get sucked into the back and forth and that is my fault.  I actually think *most* of the time bearpaw does set the example pretty well for how to respond to people who disagree with the logic, data etc. that he posts...he doesn't back down but he usually tries hard to focus on the topic, not the individual.

 :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, you've done as much name calling and or made demeaning/insulting comments as anyone on this forum. KFhunter used to have a very small sampling of your finesse in his signature. You have called me names and insulted on uncountable occasions, I am learning to ignore your low level of communication and not get drawn to that level, but occasionally it is hard to ignore your insults/name calling and human reaction gets the best of me!
I'm confused...I said I am at fault too so I don't understand your pot/kettle comment.  You and kf have said a whole lot of derogatory and condescending things about me as well...dont even try to suggest you guys are some saints.  My point is it is not a personal attack to say someone is wrong or to disagree.

I guess I misunderstood part of your post and thought you were blaming others. We all need to attempt to take higher ground in these discussions. I agree it's perfectly acceptable to disagree in a respectable manner, that's how people express themselves and can learn from others.  :tup:
Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!

http://bearpawoutfitters.com Guided Hunts, Unguided, & Drop Camps in Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wash. Hunts with tags available (no draw needed) for spring bear, fall bear, bison, cougar, elk, mule deer, turkey, whitetail, & wolf! http://trophymaps.com DIY Hunting Maps are also offered

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
or Elk smart enough to hang out in the parking lots hob knobbing with the tourists.




Bad example, there are many many many instances of elk walking into peoples' yards and causing problems in places with no wolves in sight.

These Elk are still counted in the stats that Bearpaw is providing adding to the total herd of YNP.   They're very relevant in that regard. 

Remove/Ignore all the parking lot Elk habituated to people and the charts would be even worse.

Wolves seem to have this affect on deer also, take Twisp and Winthrop as a perfect example, this spring/summer Does were having fawns in the orchard behind Hanks Market.

I guess what I find strange is that you find that strange. My folks have had deer drop fawns on their property for years. All they have is an acre lot, half of which they use for nothing, and they are three houses outside the city limits and have nothing but houses around them. Heck I see them in some of the green belts near where I live. Wolves didn't cause them to move into town, they have always just been a part of the landscape.

Maybe I'm missing some context here.   :dunno:

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
or Elk smart enough to hang out in the parking lots hob knobbing with the tourists.




Bad example, there are many many many instances of elk walking into peoples' yards and causing problems in places with no wolves in sight.

These Elk are still counted in the stats that Bearpaw is providing adding to the total herd of YNP.   They're very relevant in that regard. 

Remove/Ignore all the parking lot Elk habituated to people and the charts would be even worse.

I see where you're coming from when you put it like that. There are more and more studies out there that show a lot of different animals actually fair better on the margins of civilization than they do in more remote locations. You're right, there is some protection from predators, but a lot of it also has to do with a steady food supply and favorable cover. People don't just let nature sort it out near their homes. They kill or run off predators, garden, cut trees, remove brush, leave out trash, or let areas go for a while before clearing it out again. It's managed land in the total package.

Offline buglebrush

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Posts: 1614
Has anyone read Malcolm Gladwell's " Tipping Point" ?   Wolves were and are the elk herds " tipping point".    We need to seriously get out there and kill as many bears, coyotes, cougars, and wolves as possible. 

Like to elk hunt?  You had better start making a serious committment to predator hunting!  We can all make a difference.  Every time I kill a bear I think about the elk calves I have saved.  Maybe one is a future herd bull I will kill!   :IBCOOL:    :twocents:

Offline buglebrush

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Posts: 1614
One other bit of background.  I have hunted Idaho for over 20 years, with the lifetime license continue hunting elk there.  To you who say the wolves haven't impacted the panhandle thank God they haven't found your particular little honey hole yet.  They moved into mine a couple years ago, and there has definitely been a devastating impact.  Wolves aren't everywhere at once, but in the drainages a pack resides it is a mess.   >:(   

Offline buglebrush

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Posts: 1614
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TLdCG7wvRE

This drainage was my families honeyhole for years.  This year we continue the search for a new one  :bash:
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 10:39:30 AM by buglebrush »

Offline elkinrutdrivemenuts

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 2280
One other bit of background.  I have hunted Idaho for over 20 years, with the lifetime license continue hunting elk there.  To you who say the wolves haven't impacted the panhandle thank God they haven't found your particular little honey hole yet.  They moved into mine a couple years ago, and there has definitely been a devastating impact.  Wolves aren't everywhere at once, but in the drainages a pack resides it is a mess.   >:(

Further south around the Joe, its not good.  I know they are further north, but haven't impacted them as much as they have on the Joe.  Some areas down there that were once prime elk country now feel like ghost towns. 

Offline jasnt

  • ELR junkie
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 6539
  • Location: deer park
  • Out shooting
  • Groups: WSTA
Elk might have survived and appeared to have suitable habitat in areas before wolves came along but I very much doubt anyone here really knows what good escape cover suitable for getting away from wolves looks like. I know I don't.

Aspenbud

It looks like a river that's just deeper than a wolf is tall.  This is why a while back we were talking about over grazed rivers in Yellowstone area. The elk run in to the river where the wolf has to swim. Then the elk can drown a wolf that gets close.
https://www.howlforwildlife.org/take_action  It takes 10 seconds and it’s free. To easy to make an excuse not to make your voice heard!!!!!!

The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.
https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.04.012

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
Elk might have survived and appeared to have suitable habitat in areas before wolves came along but I very much doubt anyone here really knows what good escape cover suitable for getting away from wolves looks like. I know I don't.

Aspenbud

It looks like a river that's just deeper than a wolf is tall.  This is why a while back we were talking about over grazed rivers in Yellowstone area. The elk run in to the river where the wolf has to swim. Then the elk can drown a wolf that gets close.

This is where I disagree. Wolves and elk lived together on this continent before European settlers showed up and they coexist in the north of North America to this day. We can talk about how much more open space there is up there, and I think that has some validity. We can even talk about how they hunt wolves up there, that has some validity too. But I'm betting if you take a closer look at the habitat it has got something going for it in the elk's favor that a lot of places don't have here either by virtue of the landscape or lack of management. The way you talk, there shouldn't be any elk left in Alberta either and that is just not the case.

And again, the elk up there have been living with wolves all along, not so with those down here. Outside of a small percentage they have neither the experience and/or quite possibly the genetics to survive them. Particularly imported wolves that were practiced elk killers to begin with. That's the case in every new area that wolves move into because for the prey animals in those areas wolves are something they have never encountered before and a lot of them are not physically equipped to handle that kind of pressure let alone fight them off. They may look physically fit but they may not be genetically optimal under the hood, if you will, when wolves force them to burn more energy evading them or when the fight is on or simply knowing how to get away from them.

Wolves aren't going away in the lower 48, at least not in this political climate. Managing them is certainly going to be necessary but if you're truly serious about saving elk you'll want to look at what other things can be done to help them out.

Offline jasnt

  • ELR junkie
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 6539
  • Location: deer park
  • Out shooting
  • Groups: WSTA
I think you may have quoted the wrong post? Or misunderstood my comment. It is documented the some elk in ysnf. Run in to the river to escape wolves.  Fwiw I agree with what your saying. Much of it I've said before. :dunno:
https://www.howlforwildlife.org/take_action  It takes 10 seconds and it’s free. To easy to make an excuse not to make your voice heard!!!!!!

The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.
https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.04.012

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9187
In Spite of Directors’ Claims, Idaho Fish and Game

Refuses to Control Wolves Decimating Elk Herds

By George Dovel

In January 1999 I attended a predator symposium in Boise co-sponsored by the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Assn., Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game and eight other groups. Like many of the 17 panel members whose unsupported testimony claimed wolves would have limited impact on deer, elk and moose numbers, Wolf Education Center’s David Langhorst claimed poachers kill 10 times as much game as wolves do.

But Wildlife Ecologist Dr. Charles Kay provided facts to support his testimony – that the wolves transplanted from Canada would eventually drive Idaho’s already declining big game populations into a predator pit.

Beginning with his August 1993 Petersen’s Hunting article titled, “Wolves in the West – what the government does not want you to know about wolf recovery,” Dr. Kay had published extensive research exposing federal and many state biologists’ false claim that protecting wolves would create healthy game populations.

Biologist Can’t Refute Facts – Attacks Messenger

Unable to refute any of Dr. Kay’s expert testimony, one biologist publicly confronted him and implied that his testimony was not valid because he was not a biologist.

But Dr. Kay snapped back at him, “I’d be ashamed to admit it if I was, the way you biologists have destroyed our wildlife.”

Pretending that a simple degree in wildlife biology bestows the wisdom, integrity and judgment needed to recommend real solutions ignores reality. And attacking the credibility of the messenger is a tactic used by those who lack facts to defend their position.

These two observations are based on half a century of working alongside and closely observing wildlife biologists. Deceiving the citizen hunters who pay their wages has become a specialty with most of them.

Geist - Wolves Caused ~90% Decline in Deer Harvest

But like Dr. Kay, Dr. Valerius Geist, the featured speaker at the 1999 Symposium, strived to enlighten rather than deceive. He spent a couple of hours patiently explaining to those in attendance how the return of wolves

to Vancouver Island resulted in nearly a 90% decline in the number of black-tailed deer harvested each year by hunters.

He warned the audience that strict control of wolf numbers in Idaho must occur to prevent a similar decline in Idaho big game populations. IDFG Director Steve Mealy, who was the Symposium facilitator, summed up the consensus that wolf predation is largely additive and wolves must be limited to preserve healthy game populations.

Despite being provided ample opportunity to question Dr. Geist, Idaho biologists and Commissioners remained quiet. Yet a group of them confronted me a few minutes later and said, “He told us what was going to happen but he didn’t tell us what to do.”

Two months later, Mealey was fired by a 4-to-3 vote, and replaced with a series of pro-wolf Directors. But on Jan. 5 2006 Interior Secretary Gale Norton signed an agreement with Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne designating Idaho to act as its agent, and directing IDFG to “implement lethal control or translocation of wolves to reduce impacts on wild ungulates in accordance with the process outlined in the amended 10J Rule.” (emphasis added)

That was seven years ago and during those seven years, IDFG has had the authority and the duty to lethally control wolves to reduce their impact on elk, moose and deer – either using the 10J Rule with the 2002 Wolf Plan as a guide – or following the 2002 Wolf Plan during the two periods, including now, when the wolves were/are delisted.

So How Many Total Wolves Has Idaho Lethally Controlled to Reduce the Impact on Wild Ungulates During the Past Seven Years?

The answer is only nineteen – all in the Lolo Zone.

That 19, plus the few wolves harvested by hunters and outfitters in the Lolo Zone, failed to halt the dramatic annual decline in its elk population and harvest. Yet in the following exchange of communications dated Jan. 21, 2013, Moore tells Viola sportsman Jim Hagedorn that many people have simply not been exposed to the Department “science” on managing wolf predation on Idaho’s elk.


IDFG Refuses to Control Wolves – cont. from pg. 1 TV Interviewed Moore, Stone – Ignored Citizens

On Jan. 17, 2013 KTVB published interviews with IDFG Director Moore and Defenders of Wildlife wolf promoter Suzanne Stone at IDFG Headquarters in Boise. Moore said hunters have done a good job controlling wolves in farm and ranch areas, but said wolves are increasing and further reducing elk populations in back country areas “like the Clearwater, Lolo and Selway.”

He announced the F&G Commission had removed $50,000 from a research project and directed it to be spent killing and trapping wolves in remote areas like these. Of course Stone disagreed and said the $50,000 should be spent on non-lethal methods which she falsely claimed were more effective than lethal control.

As always happens in the urban media, KTVB ignored the majority of Idaho citizens who share ownership of the wildlife resource, and the multi-million dollar loss the exploitation of that resource by both Moore and Stone is costing them every year. This understandably upset Viola sportsman leader Jim Hagedorn who, along with many others, contributes a great deal of time and money seeking honest scientific wildlife management.

On Jan. 20, the following letter from Hagedorn to Director Moore appeared in the Forever Free Press:

A direct question for Virgil Moore:
"[IDFG's] job is actually to conserve wolves," says

Suzanne Stone with Defenders of Wildlife. "We propose that commission use the money for non-lethal tools that are more effective in reducing livestock losses, and certainly more effective in reducing the impact on wildlife, including wolves," Stone said.

"Moore says he's putting together opportunities for advocates like Stone to talk to Fish and Game biologists about their management techniques."

Director Moore, would you please explain to me why you would waste your time, your IDFG employees' time, and MY MONEY, by opening a channel of communication to your (or MY) employees so a clearly deranged individual (Stone) who can NEVER seem to get her facts straight with the media, or anyone else for that matter, can have ANYTHING to do with advising FISH and GAME management in Idaho?

------
The following day, Hagedorn emailed a copy to

Moore and to several legislators, commissioners and other knowledgeable individuals. The subject line said simply, “How about an answer Virgil?

He quickly received the following response from Moore:

Jim,
I decided to go over the science that wolves are

important predators to elk. Based on the testimony at the

Commission meeting last week by 16 individuals it is apparent to the Commission that many people simply have not been exposed to the Department science on managing predation on Idaho’s elk. The meeting with folks concerned about our wolf reduction efforts is to allow a more in-depth opportunity to present Department information and answer questions that could not be addressed at the public meeting.

Ms. Stone is looking for an opportunity to do more of the non-lethal management that has been tried in the Blain (sic) County area. It certainly will not work for wildlife depredation and does not work in most livestock grazing situations either. Her statements do not represent what we are trying to accomplish by providing the correct information on hunting, trapping and aerial methods of reducing wolf numbers.

Jim – I believe some of these folks can be moderated by the correct information based on my discussion with some of them at the Commission meeting- as they do not have the correct information to judge the Department program properly. I do not believe, as you do, that Defenders of Wildlife can be convinced though but the discussion of what we are planning is open to public discussion and public input and we do have an obligation to meet with folks when appropriate.

I hope this helps. Let me know if we need to talk and I’ll give you a call.

Virgil

------

The Facts

The Department “science” on managing wolf predation of elk is a myth.

Every authority on wolf-ungulate management – including L. David Mech – who has advised IDFG on this issue, has warned that 70-80% of wolves must be removed initially, and the reduced numbers maintained for at least five years in order to restore healthy ungulate populations.

When the Lolo elk herd was still estimated at about 4,000 animals, IDFG biologists carefully prepared a 10J Plan to lethally remove 75% of the wolves from the Lolo Zone the first year, and kill enough wolves for the next four years to maintain 20-30% of the original number. But instead of implementing the plan to rebuild the Lolo elk herd, the Commission voted to use it only as “leverage” (i.e. blackmail) to FWS to insure they would be allowed to manage wolves as game animals.

They got the “on again – off again” right to hold a wolf hunting season but hunters killed only 13 Lolo wolves and the Lolo elk population went down the tube. Anyone who takes the time to compare IDFG’s published annual elk harvest statistics will find that elk harvests have also nose-dived every year in all back country units since the Commission approved the 10J plan – but refused to use it.

And Moore’s promise to the Commissioners and the public when he was hired as Director two years ago –that he would also implement wolf control in 2011 in the Selway and other units where wolves were also impacting elk – was never kept. Between 2006 and 2011, both of Moore’s predecessors, Steve Huffaker and Cal Groen, made similar promises that were also never kept.

It is worth noting that at the same time former Director Steve Mealey was telling a packed Commission Meeting audience that wolves were having a detrimental effect on Idaho elk herds, his Wildlife Bureau Chief Huffaker was standing in the back of that room telling a reporter that wolves had co-evolved with elk for ten thousand years and would “reach a balance” without man’s interference.

In February of 2006 when the IDFG plan to remove 75% of the Lolo Zone wolves was being “scoped” by the public, a letter writing campaign by radical pro-wolf groups supplied then Director Huffaker with the excuses he needed to convince the Commission not to control the wolves.

A Feb. 14, 2006 letter from Tami Williams of Wolf Haven International at Tenino, Washington, reminded Huffaker of the large cost of paying (Wildlife Services) to control 75% of the Lolo wolves. She speculated IDFG would get a hunting season if it waited and said, “With patience, wolf control could end up as a revenue generator rather than a revenue drain for IDFG.”

Instead of obeying Idaho Wildlife Policy in I.C. Sec. 36-103 (to preserve, protect, perpetuate and manage all wildlife), Huffaker and his biologists chose to listen to the wolf advocates and sacrifice the Lolo elk herd. Large Carnivore Coordinator Steve Nadeau prepared a 2006 10J wolf control plan claiming that declining habitat – not over- harvesting and later wolf predation – was the primary cause of the elk decline.

Nadeau’s lie ignored Clearwater elk research biologist George Pauley’s long-term and well documented research concluding that allowing hunters to kill too many bull elk was the cause of the steady decline in Lolo elk from 1986 – 2005. Read “IDFG – No Evidence Links Lolo Elk Loss to Habitat!” on Pages 6-8 of Outdoorsman No. 40.

Ignoring Pauley’s 1996 warning to stop over- harvesting bull elk, Clearwater Region Supervisor Herb Pollard increased the number of 1996 antlerless elk permits in the Lolo Zone from 350 to 1,900! In Dec. of 1996 when Steve Mealey was hired as IDFG Director, he replaced Pollard with Natural Resources Policy Director Cal Groen to halt the deliberate over-harvest.

But in 1997, Groen reduced the 1,900 antlerless permits by only 50 and changed 525 permits so hunts would end on Nov. 30 instead of Nov. 13. See results of Pollard’s and Groen’s mismanagement in harvest chart below:

IDFG Lolo Zone Elk Harvest Statistics

 Year         1989    1992      1994       1995      1996       1997        1998       2011

Female     156        200        223         166         277         277          7               0

Antlered     1819     1447      1268       1759      316        316          264         83

Total           1975       1647     1491        1925     1237      593         271         83



The 2006 10J wolf control plan could easily have been corrected by replacing Nadeau’s false claims with Pauley’s facts, and then submitting it to FWS. But even two years later, in 2008, IDFG Director Groen and F&G Commissioner Gary Power told the Legislature and the media that IDFG had no intention of controlling wolves in Idaho’s wilderness areas.

The appointment of Groen to the Governor’s staff in 2007 was apparently seen as an opportunity for IDFG to ignore Idaho law and the Legislature. Groen’s direction to Nadeau, to write an IDFG Wolf Plan containing massive changes to the only wolf plan approved by the Legislature, and Groen’s failure to transmit that plan for legislative approval or rejection, reflects his willingness to ignore state law and the welfare of Idaho wildlife.

The IDFG conspiracy that bypassed the lawful process and resulted in Groen, Otter and Otter’s Office of Species Conservation telling FWS Director Dale Hall that IDFG will manage for five times as many wolves as agreed to in the FWS Recovery Plan, happened without public or legislative input.

Idaho’s 2002 wolf plan emphasizes several times on pages 21 and 23 how extremely important it is for IDFG to conduct an annual census of selected important prey species. The Lolo Zone elk met every criterion for annual monitoring – yet in the 11 years since that plan was approved by the Legislature – IDFG has conducted only two counts in Unit 10 and three counts in Unit 12!

And when Nadeau wrote the *censored* wolf plan in 2007 – approved unanimously by the F&G Commission on March 6, 2008 – the “annual count” language was changed to once every three to five years, plus it allowed biologists to wait another three years before taking any action! On May 22, 2008 Groen gave Nadeau an “Employee of the Year” Award for “outstanding management/leadership.”

In February of 2009, Pauley met with Montana sportsmen and the media and said there were 130-150 wolves in the Lolo Zone. He advised that the State of Idaho was making a request to shoot about 80% (104-120) of them, and would leave a minimum of 25 wolves.

Although Pauley said the 10J proposal would be presented to FWS shortly and Unsworth confirmed it, neither had any intention of controlling wolves. This was simply designed to show hard core wolf advocates they had better not oppose delisting or IDFG would kill 100 wolves in one location.

Even after Senator Jeff Siddoway forced IDFG to commit to control Lolo Zone wolves during the 2011-2012 winter, Deputy Director Unsworth ordered the helicopter control halted on the third day despite ideal conditions. Only 14 wolves were taken in that brief control action and Wildlife Services told me I would have to talk to Unsworth to find out why. The wolf control figures Unsworth claimed would reduce big game predation in the Lolo Zone were far too low to have any measurable impact.




http://idahoforwildlife.com/files/pdf/The_Outdoorsman_No_51_Dec_2012_-_Mar_2013.pdf


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
« Last Edit: August 11, 2014, 03:12:53 PM by wolfbait »

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

New York deer by Bearhunter308
[Yesterday at 10:14:19 PM]


Anybody breeding meat rabbit? by jackelope
[Yesterday at 10:02:50 PM]


DIY Ucluelet trip by metlhead
[Yesterday at 09:40:00 PM]


Survey in ? by metlhead
[Yesterday at 09:35:57 PM]


Alaska Fishing Guide and Lodge Recommendations by Tbar
[Yesterday at 09:31:49 PM]


Colorado Results by cem3434
[Yesterday at 08:35:51 PM]


NEED ADVICE: LATE after JUNE 15th IDAHO BEAR by Sliverslinger
[Yesterday at 08:31:23 PM]


Resetting dash warning lights by Sandberm
[Yesterday at 08:13:27 PM]


Please Report Problems & Bugs Here by Mossy
[Yesterday at 06:17:02 PM]


What's flatbed pickup life like? by Special T
[Yesterday at 05:52:28 PM]


Oregon spring bear by Fidelk
[Yesterday at 04:58:27 PM]


Idaho General Season Going to Draw for Nonresidents by idahohuntr
[Yesterday at 01:51:40 PM]


Seekins PH2 & Element sale by BigJs Outdoor Store
[Yesterday at 12:40:26 PM]


Kokanee Fishing Tournament!! 🎣 June 13-14, Joseph OR by WRKG4GD
[Yesterday at 11:42:02 AM]


wings wings and more wings! by birddogdad
[Yesterday at 11:00:11 AM]


Jim Horn's elk calling, instructional audio CD's. by WapitiTalk1
[Yesterday at 09:46:03 AM]


Wyoming elk who's in? by link
[Yesterday at 07:00:33 AM]


CVA Optima V2 durasight rail mod by craigapphunt
[Yesterday at 05:56:00 AM]


Last year putting in… by wa.hunter
[May 28, 2025, 11:02:00 PM]


HUNTNNW 2025 trail cam thread and photos by huntnnw
[May 28, 2025, 10:34:36 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal